The Guardian today released a video that clearly show London police in an unprovoked attack upon Ian Tomlinson during the recent protests of the G-20 economic summit. Tomlinson collapsed and died minutes after the attack. To say that the video calls into question the police version of events is more than an understatement. The earlier police version was, quite simply, a lie.
Boris Johnson, the London mayor, is pressing for a "speedy and thorough" inquiry by the police complaints body, his chief spokesman said. He said the mayor watched the footage today and had been seriously concerned by what he witnessed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/...
Unfortunately, the investigation will be carried out by the London police.
Correction - - the Guardian is now reporting that the London police WILL NOT be carrying out the investigation.
This is simply the latest incident in a murderous pattern of deaths due to excessive access to force and excessive willingness to use that force among police forces worldwide. In Great Britain the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) failed to implicate any officer in the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes, a Brazilian shot in the London subway in 2005.
One of the most infamous cases of excessive police violence in the United States was the killing of Amadou Diallo in New York in 1999. Diallo, a West African immigrant, was killed in a hail of gunfire on the steps of his apartment in the Bronx. The four officers who fired the 41 bullets at the unarmed man were all acquitted.
In Atlanta, police burst into the home of 92-year old Kathryn Johnston in 2006. Terrified, she fired at the intruders only to be killed by a hail of return fire. The police had the wrong address. More disturbing – the paperwork used to justify the "no-knock" raid had been falsified. It was the federal investigation – not the Atlanta police investigation – which produced the evidence that led to the conviction of the three officers who killed Johnston.
Are these killings cases of murder? I would argue that they are – even if not first-degree murder.
If I am driving a car with bald tires, while intoxicated, and speeding – and kill a pedestrian, I will, almost certainly, be convicted vehicular homicide and, more likely, of second-degree murder. Although I had not intended to kill anyone, the extreme recklessness of my actions constitutes malice of great enough extent for legal culpability.
In today’s police forces worldwide, at least three factors combine to make the killing of Ian Tomlinson and others a near-certainty – not an unfortunate accident. First, the firepower of police has increased geometrically in the past generation. From SWAT AK-47s are routinely issued to beat officers. When used, the likelihood of fatalities is far greater. Second, the militarization of police forces continues unchecked. To question whether more funds should be expended upon police is viewed as irresponsible, at best, and abetting the criminal, on Faux Newz. Local police forces resemble a small army with helicopter gunships and LRAD sonic weaponry. Third, and most dangerously, the police mentality has been transformed from one of public servant to public enforcer - back by the Blue Wall code of silence. The combination is deadly.
And before you go - - take a look at a map of botched paramilitary raids in the United States. From the Cato Institute, no less. Hardly a left-wing think tank.
http://www.cato.org/...
As tragic as the death of Ian Tomlinson was – and as complicit as the London police appear to be, this is not an issue that ought to be resolved within a specific, singular context. Rather, the prosecution of those responsible for the killing of Ian Tomlinson should be a springboard for challenging the militarization of our societies worldwide. That would be justice for Ian.